Social Construction of Reality - Bad Request

evaluator, but also the program supervisor as well to work with the program manager in
advance of the evaluation. This is an important step in reducing evaluation anxiety,
which could negatively impact the fabric of the organization if not properly addressed.
Another procedural conclusion is that the organization must continue to educate
all program managers on how to construct operationalizable logic models for their
individual programs in advance of the program evaluation. Archival data and interviews
emphasized the significance of requiring logic models. This requirement is one way to
reduce program evaluation time commitment; it also supports evaluation capacity
building, addressed in the following section.
The final procedural conclusion stems from all of the others, The School District
will increase knowledge creation, improve systemic thinking, build evaluative capacity,
and change organizational culture by adopting an agreed upon program evaluation model,
perhaps one comprised of the tools generated by this study.
Process-use conclusions. The most notable process use conclusion is that
stakeholders are open to intentionally providing for process use and evaluative capacity
building. Patton (1997) notes “the possibility and desirability of learning from evaluation
processes as well as findings can be made intentional and purposeful. In other words,
instead of treating process use as an informal offshoot, explicit and up-front attention to
the potential impacts of evaluation logic and processes can increase those impacts and
make them a planned purpose for undertaking the evaluation. In that way, the
evaluation’s overall utility is increased” (p. 88). It is important to distinguish process use
from use of evaluation findings. Patton (1997) defines process use as the “purposeful
application of the evaluation process to teach evaluative inquiry” (King, 2007). This
98